Don’t jump to second guesses

I would have preferred that Obama’s attorney had showed up this morning in Atlanta to make a vigorous defense and say all those things I was itching to say. I would have liked to have seen the COLB up close and personal. It didn’t happen.

Speculation abounds and many are ready to claim victory. Some are ready to throw Jablonski under the bus.

I don’t know the whole story. I don’t know Obama’s plans, but I would admit that whoever is making those plans is probably a lot more savvy than I am, both legally and politically. So I’m going to try not to jump to conclusions and I’m going to try not to second guess the defense. I would certainly have liked to see some resolution, but these conspiracy theories never get resolved, really.

In the meantime, a new poll shows Obama’s lead over any potential Republican rival growing.

neither Judge Malihi nor Kemp are aware of the vitriol that will come their way if they allow Obama on the ballot, more than likely they have no idea of the hate that is in the birther movement, Surprize, Suprize! They don’t deserve it, but it will come!

Well then instead of second-guessing, I suppose I’ll speculate. If this is all part of a plan, then the only plan I can imagine is that they’re practically daring the SoS to take Obama’s name off the ballot. That is, they’re trying to maximize the usefulness of this incident as a political football.

And that idea doesn’t sit real well with me. I’m not that crazy about political footballs in general, but this one seems to involve a significant level of rudeness toward the judge and the SoS which neither have done anything to deserve.

I agree with the first half of your post, but disagree with the latter part. There seems to be a lot of poor behavior and decision making to go around here.

The Judge / SoS could have easily contained a lot of this craziness instead of just letting the circus act grow. For a short time, they were even trying to move the venue to a larger court arena – which smacks of intentionally trying to lend it an air of additional “credibility” and just playing up to wanting a media circus. One of the criticisms that Jablonski kept making that I have to completely agree with is that the judge was NOT being impartial in his actions on any of this – the judge really was holding the defense to a higher standard of expectations than how it treated any of the filings from the litigants. All of these folks are attorneys, so there is no reason to give undue leeway and free passes to one side over the other. Further, while I agree with the judge’s point of asking the defense to better provide support in its motion, I also completely agree with the defense’s frustration that the judge chose to come down hard and rule on that particular nitpick area of weakness, yet was *completely silent* about all the rest of the very valid and fair points that the defense also made as a reason to outright dismiss earlier in that same document. Yet the judge remained silent on any of the subpoena’s or other faulty interim filings made by the litigants, every step of the way…

So yes, it sure comes across suspiciously like the SoS & the judge were also playing an intentional double-standard biased political game here the whole time and intentionally taking actions (or inactions) that held one side to a different standard than the other and which also seemed to only continue to elevate the circus aspect of this whole farce…

Dave: And that idea doesn’t sit real well with me. I’m not that crazy about political footballs in general, but this one seems to involve a significant level of rudeness toward the judge and the SoS which neither have done anything to deserve.

Dave: this one seems to involve a significant level of rudeness toward the judge and the SoS which neither have done anything to deserve.

I don’t agree. I feel it’s a refusal to participate as a group of nuts take advantage of an otherwise useful, necessary process. Voters must have the right to protect themselves from unqualified / illegitimate candidates. Unfortunately, valuable resources can be misused. I’m sorry the judge had to listen to the foolishness in the course of his duties. I’m sorry the SoS has been put on the spot between fairness and decency. Thankfully, the President and his representation are in an unassailable position and able to say, “Let them have their hearing, we will not particiapte.”

I had to serve on a jury in a car wreck case once. It turned out to be just as ludicrous as today’s hearing. It lasted 3 full days. The case had taken 7 years to come to a hearing. The plaintiff was taking advantage of the civil court system and the way in which fault is assigned to try to saddle the defendant with part or all of $200K in medical bills for treatments of conditions in no way related to the accident. The defendant was 16 at the time of the accident, and this stupidity had been threatening to bankrupt her her entire adult life. She had no choice but to actively defend herself against a malicious litigant.

I wish she had had the luxury of giving the court the legal equivalent of a “Whatever.” I and my fellow jurors considered the 3 days time well spent doing my part to put an end to that madness. Against 7 years, what’s 3 days? And I would have been in the jury pool anyway.

G: The Judge / SoS could have easily contained a lot of this craziness instead of just letting the circus act grow. For a short time, they were even trying to move the venue to a larger court arena – which smacks of intentionally trying to lend it an air of additional “credibility” and just playing up to wanting a media circus.

I continue to disagree with those wanting to place blame on Malihi a/o Kemp. They are performing their duties in accordance with the law. Maintaining an open fair process. The fairness of any system is seen in how it handles extremes. The birthers were voters and had a right to a hearing. To my understanding they did not have to prove that a challenge was reasonable in order to proceed. The law states they have a right to have their concerns heard. As it was a public hearing, of course it should be held in a venue in which capacity matches interest. As for the “at your peril” line, well of course you pass up your chance to present your side “at your peril.” It wasn’t a threat, it was stating the obvious. And of course the hearing should have been held. Postponing or cancelling would have been bad precedent, and the rights of Georgia voters, birthers or not, co-opted by out-of-state elements or not, are the business of the court.

While I fully understand all your points and think that you’ve articulated them well, this will just have to be an area where our impressions and opinions differ.

I see blame going all around – not necessarily in the sense that they were “wrong”… but that each of them had better ways to handle and contain this situation from becoming the farcical show that it is now. It seemed to be a continuing set of escalations…and yes…it came across as some sort of bigger pissing contest going on. Now, I could easily be wrong on that, but that is just how it comes across.

In terms of absolving culpability of the judge: Look – I can understand someone maybe simply having a position of “just let them vent and get it out of their system”… doesn’t mean I would have done the same thing, but I respect that different folks can get to the same result using different methods. If that was the judge’s intent, than I do give him points in final execution as the Birther crowd seemed rather mollified by getting to do their little open forum display show today…and do have to say that it succeeded in getting them to get through their spiel’s rather quickly. Even Orly – that might be darn near a record for how quickly she went from start to finish!!! So, in the lense of that particular critera – the judge got things done quite quickly and with minimum conflict today. That is a good thing.

However, that being said, the two things that do concern me the most about the judge is:

1) His original attempt to give it a much bigger and more “formal court” venue. Maybe that was just a misguided innocent attempt to merely accomodate…but it smacks of stunt casting. Fortunately, someone quickly put the kibosh on that idea and returned it to the forum we saw.

2) All of the litigants had attorneys. There is no excuse to treat the defense attorney to a more critical standard from the get-go than the litigants. So yes, I do blame the judge for applying a different set of standards here. If there is some other “history” between the judge and this attorney or in terms of the politics at play on the ground there – those are not excuses and such bias had no place in being introduced into this particular situation.

So, the judge’s initial denial back to Jablonski seems to have started this pattern. Was he right that Jablonski should have written a better motion with more solid citation – yes. However, if you read the original motion and the judge’s response back to back and in full again, you will see that there were several other important points that Jablonski had brought up before getting to the weak part that the judge slapped him down on. Why did the judge completely ignore those sections completely? I can see Jablonski’s side of being pissed at this portion of the treatment too. It does smack of being selectively unfair from the get-go. Also, with any of the also weak motions filed by the litigants, why didn’t the judge respond to them and hold them to the same level of expectation?

I’d like to hear your specific thoughts on those two key points…

JPotter: I continue to disagree with those wanting to place blame on Malihi a/o Kemp. They are performing their duties in accordance with the law. Maintaining an open fair process. The fairness of any system is seen in how it handles extremes. The birthers were voters and had a right to a hearing. To my understanding they did not have to prove that a challenge was reasonable in order to proceed. The law states they have a right to have their concerns heard. As it was a public hearing, of course it should be held in a venue in which capacity matches interest. As for the “at your peril” line, well of course you pass up your chance to present your side “at your peril.” It wasn’t a threat, it was stating the obvious. And of course the hearing should have been held. Postponing or cancelling would have been bad precedent, and the rights of Georgia voters, birthers or not, co-opted by out-of-state elements or not, are the business of the court.

G:
However, that being said, the two things that do concern me the most about the judge is:

1) His original attempt to give it a much bigger and more “formal court” venue.Maybe that was just a misguided innocent attempt to merely accomodate…but it smacks of stunt casting.Fortunately, someone quickly put the kibosh on that idea and returned it to the forum we saw.

From watching the streaming video, the hearing room they had wasn’t that much different than some of the courtrooms I’ve been in. It’s basic office room decor, a low ceiling, and movie theater style seating. I was expecting that it might be like the dinky traffic courtroom in San Francisco I visited once (there were something like a dozen of them handling over 100 cases an hour in total. Or maybe the tiny single courtroom courthouse in Yosemite National Park. I mentioned I didn’t particular want to be there, but I suppose it might be possible to just be a spectator just to see what it looks like in person.

It’s fun to joke about these things, and I make my fair share (Vatel Swiss Cheese Spreads, Two-Parent Two Step, Georgia Birfdogs, etc) … but in the trend of ‘more serious’ running down of Judge Malihi, Sec. Kemp, et al.* … I’m hearing the assumption of sinister motives … intents being projected based on scant, distant impressions …. and allegations of double standards. This is conspiratorial thinking, a loss of objectivity.

1) I addressed the physical venue before; it was pragmatic. Calling it misguided is a perception. Instead of repeating earlier post, I’ll toss in the media coverage. Again, nothing sinister there; it’s a public matter, involving a popular election. There’s no need for privacy in a election hearing. Quite the opposite: it’s a public matter, publicity is necessary.

2) How was the defense held to a more ‘critical’ standard? As far as whether there will be a hearing, the Georgia law is broad, and justly so. It places the defense at a disadvantage in a sense. Similar to the concept of no-fault divorce, there doesn’t appear to be a reason for not having a hearing, unless the named defendant is either not a candidate or running for local office only. As for the subpoenas, again, the defense was requesting the judge take an action and failed to provide cause for him to act, there may wall not be a rlevant cause, and action was not needed from the judge. The subpoenas were not endorsed by him, were not enforceable by him. The best course of action was to ignore them, or to politely RSVP in the negative to their Moldovan source.

Put yourself in Malihi’s shoes, think about his function, his responsibilities; imagine other defendants, other plaintiffs, similar filings. Malihi has handled the case responsibly, wisely, fairly. He had to respond to the defense filings that were requesting action on his part prior to the hearing; most of the defense filings were … uh … ‘informational’, (additional lining for the circular file) that required no action on his part, beyond perhaps a mention in his opinion. Orly did (supposedly) file for letter rogatory. If he has responded to her already, Orly may be sitting on it**, or he may just be ignoring the request.
A simpler angle: he has responded to Jablonski’s filings. All birther grenades lobbed thus far have met with an icy reception.

If there are any items I’m not aware of, that indicate which orifice I’m typing out of ( 😉 ), please let me know. Like most of us, I’m sharing from afar.

And I told myself I would keep this short!

* Gov. Deal has birfed, but he doesn’t get tossed in very much. Why not?
** She publishes everything she likes immediately. Does she publish her failures?

“She publishes everything she likes immediately. Does she publish her failures?”

I’ve not yet seen any evidence of such.

Ironically, her largest fault may be her lack of humility.
For all her failures are first branded as successes, then later attributed to others with blame.
She seems to be the antithesis to Obama in every respect, stacking failure upon failure in stark contrast to his own vertical history of successes.

“Orly did (supposedly) file for letter rogatory. If he has responded to her already, Orly may be sitting on it**, or he may just be ignoring the request.”

her “Emergency request for letters rogatory” was a “request and commission from
Honorable judge Malihi to Honorable judge Rhonda Nishimura if the First Circuit
court of the state of HI to order director of Health Loretta Fuddy to appear at the January 26, 2012 hearing in Farrar v Obama and produce a book of birth records with the original birth certificate of Mr. Barack Obama, as well as corresponding microfiche film.”

Dr. Taitz has no failures. When she does not win, it is because of traitors who got to the judge. They will be arrested, tried, convicted and frog-marched, and not necesarily in that order.

She is still trumpting her request for letters rogatory, which, if I have got my law terms right, has become moot since the taking of evidence by Judge Mailihi, such that it was, is over. Except for the hundreds of pages of filings folks will be making.

Doc, I notice ‘Sheriff Arpaio’ is noticeably missing from your Who’s Who list?

Oh yeah, he’s just the criminal investigator who will imminently publish the detailed police report on obamugabe’s false B.C. and fraudulent SSN….small details. Yeah, I can see why an obamabot like you wouldn’t want to get near that.

That should be interesting to a few more states too.

You may want to publish how many electoral votes are in jeopardy for your commie impostor as this develops…15 in Georgia alone.

“Dr. Taitz has no failures. When she does not win, it is because of traitors who got to the judge. They will be arrested, tried, convicted and frog-marched, and not necesarily in that order. ”

all of THESE judges?

INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO

93 TRIAL COURTS

52 (X3 JUDGE) APPELLATE COURTS

16 (X9) SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

41 FAILED state birther bills

“She is still trumpting her request for letters rogatory, which, if I have got my law terms right, has become moot since the taking of evidence by Judge Mailihi, such that it was, is over. ”

moot? “her letters” were to compel the state of HI to order director of Health Loretta Fuddy to appear at the January 26, 2012 hearing in Farrar v Obama and produce a book of birth records with the original birth certificate of Mr. Barack Obama, as well as corresponding microfiche film.”

You are confusing the situation with facts. In Dr. Taitz’ view, this is the most massive conspiracy in the history of the known universe, including Moldova. I’m confident our friends in the birther community are getting ready to (a) praise Judge Malihi has the bravest judge ever, or (b) yet another traitor.

“You may want to publish how many electoral votes are in jeopardy for your commie impostor as this develops…15 in Georgia alone.”

question: newt is NOT on the va primary ballot – if your conclusion is that this will matter at the convention, you are mistaken – if he has the requisite number of delegates, WITH OR WITHOUT VA, he will be on the ballot in nov – obama already has 144 delegates and no one is opposing him

I add folks to the categories when I think they will appear in many stories. It’s just a matter of not letting the category list get toooooo long. For now, Arpaio just gets a tag, so you can find articles about him with

masochism |ˈmasəˌkizəm; ˈmaz-|
noun
the tendency to derive pleasure, esp. sexual gratification, from one’s own pain or humiliation.
(in general use) the enjoyment of what appears to be painful or tiresome : isn’t there
some masochism involved in taking on this kind of project?

Anybody with two brain cells to rub together knows that the BC we’ve seen on lilne is not the real one, it’s only a copy. The real one is in the vault in Honolulu. But people with far more credibility than Linethesand have vouched for seeing a copy that the Hawaii DOH vouches for as an authentic copy of the real thing. If I were to send you a photocopy of my son’s BC, it would be only a copy, but that doesn’t make it a forgery. This is one of the most inane lines pushed by the birthers.

LineInTheSand: Given that his investigators have no access to the actual b.c. nor to Social Securiity records, they will be unable to draw any conclusions.’So you admit that the b.c. we’ve seen from obama is not the actual one. Thank you for that, it will be entered into the evidence.

Hey, that’s not what he meant AT ALL! Guys, this Sandy Line fellow is just too smart. Why, he’s so smart, he even knows how to turn comments on a blog into cold, hard EVIDENCE. Do you think he’ll present when the trial moves into it’s punishment phase? I’m TERRIFIED!!!

JD Reed: Anybody with two brain cells to rub together knows that the BC we’ve seen on lilne is not the real one, it’s only a copy. The real one is in the vault in Honolulu

I’ve never counted my neurons and I try to avoid rubbing them together. The COLB(s) and the long form document in the President’s possession and shown to reporters are in fact the real birth certificates. One exemplar may have been presented or mya be presented to the Georgia SoS. Regardless, one of the plaintiff’s attorneys stipulated that the image is true and authentic and establishes the birth place, time and parentage of the President,

Sheriff Arpaio has no substantive authority in this matter. He has no authority to interpret the natural born citizen clause in the U.S. Constitution – he’s a law enforcement officer, not a federal judge. Nor does he have evidence that any crime has been committed – he’s already admitted this. When he issues his so-called “cold case posse report” in February he will say that he doesn’t have evidence to verify Obama’s birth certificate is genuine. But then, neither does he evidence it isn’t.

Frankly, if Mr. Obama’s birth certificates were forged, criminal charges would have been filed and litigated a long time ago. It hasn’t happened because they aren’t forged, they’re certified copies for which the State of Hawaii has verified their authenticity.

alg, when did you become omniscient? How do you know what Arpaio will reveal? He has authority as a police officer acting under color of law – that opens doors with any other national police contacts he has. You’re talking completely out of your a**, like most of the obamabot cretins here.

LineInTheSand: Oh yeah, he’s just the criminal investigator who will imminently publish the detailed police report on obamugabe’s false B.C. and fraudulent SSN….small details. Yeah, I can see why an obamabot like you wouldn’t want to get near that.

Sure he will….just like Donald Trump will let us know the startling revelations his investigators found any day now. If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

LineInTheSand: That should be interesting to a few more states too.
You may want to publish how many electoral votes are in jeopardy for your commie impostor as this develops…15 in Georgia alone.

I can assure you, that President Obama will appear on the ballot in every state in the general election. Keep hoping. Birther optismism can be very cute.

LineInTheSand: So you admit that the b.c. we’ve seen from obama is not the actual one. Thank you for that, it will be entered into the evidence.

Ummm….you want to enter into evidence the admission that we have not been in the same room as the physical document? And what exactly does that prove?

I suppose we could have a philosophical discussion of whether the US Constitution exists, since the vast majority of Americans have never seen the physical document…perhaps it shouldn’t apply to a person until they see it? Afterall, how can they be sure it exists? But again, what’s the point?

Some questions about the hearing courtesy of Sterngard Friegen on RC Radio and a few of my own:

1. Where were the rest of Taitz’s witnesses?

2. Where was Taitz’s proof on behalf of her woebegone plaintiff presidential candidate wannabees to get on the Georgia ballot?

3. Where was the lawyer with 20-years experience that Taitz was going to pay to help her? Did he run the Powerpoint? How’d he do?

4. If Taitz had been successful in obtaining the Hawaii birth documents, wouldn’t she have submitted the prima facie evidence of President Obama’s eligibility? Do you think she’s pissed off that those documents were put into evidence in the prior cases?

and mine

5. Where was Sheriff Arpaio and why did Taitz not seek to enforce her subpoena to him?

6. How does Malihi fashion a “finding of fact” and rule Obama off the ballot out of that mess presented yesterday? About the only facts established in the case are that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii and his father was a foreign student from somewhere. The rest was idle speculation and worse.

7. Will the US Attorney take notice that at least two of Taitz’s witnesses admitted under oath to unlawful access to government databases?

Now back to the original point of the post….the claims of default. It’s 24 hours later, Orly has added several new posts to her blog, and has not said a word about discussion of a default. Orly is hardly one to shy away from prematurely declaring victory, so I have to ask, what’s up with it?

“If Taitz had been successful in obtaining the Hawaii birth documents, wouldn’t she have submitted the prima facie evidence of President Obama’s eligibility? Do you think she’s pissed off that those documents were put into evidence in the prior cases?”

taitz filed an “Emergency request for letters rogatory” (January 20, 2012) to “order director of Health Loretta Fuddy to appear at the January 26, 2012 hearing in Farrar v Obama and produce a book of birth records with the original birth certificate of Mr. Barack Obama, as well as corresponding microfiche film.”

how did THAT work out?

in taitz’s mind, ANYTHING submitted into evidence in prior cases are “forgeries”

Reality Check: 6. How does Malihi fashion a “finding of fact” and rule Obama off the ballot out of that mess presented yesterday? About the only facts established in the case are that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii and his father was a foreign student from somewhere. The rest was idle speculation and worse.

Well, the route of “Obama didn’t present any evidence and even if I take the birthers’ evidence as fact, I still haven’t seen Obama prove his 14 year residency”, if he really really wanted to. But I don’t think he will.

He might have given a lot of leeway for the birthers because public hearings on such challenges aren’t supposed to be strict trials, but I don’t see him giving the same leeway to any bogus objection.

I understand that there is still time to file briefs, until Feb. 5 I hear, so that Jablonski could do so.

I’m not a lawyer, but it would seem sensible to do so.

It would say something like this I suggest.

There are only two issues, the place of Obama’s birth and the meaning of Natural Born Citizen.

As to the first, Obama’s place of birth was Hawaii. If you do not believe that this has been established OVERWHELMINGLY already, then I will be glad to supply the physical copies of Obama’s short form and long form birth certificates, with the official seals.

As to the second, the allegation that the US Supreme Court ruled in Minor that two citizen parents is required is false. But as you know the US Supreme Court ruled in Wong Kim Ark that every child born in the USA except for the children of foreign diplomats is Natural Born. Logically a US citizen who was Natural Born is a Natural Born Citizen.

All excellent questions. All humans suffer from a disconnect between expectations and reality. Some people are more disconnected than others. Birthers expectations are in the fantasy realm. At the moment expectiation are forced to confront reality, the level of disconnect translates to an equivalent level of cognitive dissonance. After the moment, the dissonance ferments into denial, and the person has entered a Kübler-Ross cycle.

Orly has an extreme potential for disconnect. Her cases, their rationale and her strategies, are totally irrational desire dreams. Her enthusiastic willingness to act on her fantasies in defiance of social norms, combined with her inability to recognize / overcome denial, indicates her level of … take your pick: neuroticism, sociopathy, psychoses? any psychologists in the house?

The massive disconnect is apparent in her courtroom performances; she has no problem reading her fantasies to a court, but no ability to realize her fantasies by effective action. Doc said he would fire such an unprepared person on the spot. I’d say there is no realistic way to prepare, to actualize her fantasies. No amount of preparation can bridge her disconnect, which continues to manifest itself after her court actions, as she gives voice to her denial, in speeches that invariably make everyone (except her most deluded followers!), wonder which courtroom she was in.

Recently, a lawsuit was filed claiming that Mr. Obama is not qualified to run for President and should not appear on Georgia’s ballot. See Terry v. Handel, In the Superior Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia, Civil Action File No. 2008CV158774. On October 24, 2008, the Court entered an Order recognizing that in Georgia, as elsewhere in the United States, voters cast their ballots for “presidential electors,” rather than directly for a candidate, when voting for the office of President of the United States. See, e.g., U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 3; O.C.G.A. § 21-2-172. Because of this, the Secretary of State of Georgia does not have the authority to refuse to allow someone to be listed as a candidate for President of the United States when such individual has been properly nominated by a political party. See O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-172 to 21-2-200. Rather, Georgia law imposes duties simply for the examination of presidential electors. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-172. The political parties’ candidates for President of the United States are typically determined through a political party’s convention. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-191 to 21-2-200. Therefore, any concerns you may have regarding the qualifications of Mr. Obama to remain on Georgia’s ballot as a candidate for President of the United States should be directed to the Democratic National Party.

LineInTheSand: You and your obamabots starting to squirm yet, Doc? I’ve read your crap for a year now and your house of cards is falling down.Lovin’ it.

…and finally, line/in/stupid/sand, the day that President Obama’s “house” falls down because of some birther crap is the very same day President Obama will moonwalk naked on the White House lawn with a line of birhers behind him…….

LineInTheSand: Doc, I notice Sheriff Arpaio’ is noticeably missing from your Who’s Who list? Oh yeah, he’s just the criminal investigator who will imminently publish the detailed police report on obamugabe’s false B.C. and fraudulent SSN….small details. Yeah, I can see why an obamabot like you wouldn’t want to get near that.That should be interesting to a few more states too.You may want to publish how many electoral votes are in jeopardy for your commie impostor as this develops…15 in Georgia alone.Good luck with that…

Arpaio is not noticeably missing……..no one gives a rats ass about his “report.”

Dude, you’re a desparate birther who is, as usual for birthers, waiting for the AH HA moment when the scary black man will no longer be YOUR president. Let me help you out……that will be in November, 2016 (Obama will win re-election in 2012) when we will have another presidential election in this country and you can vote for any white man/woman in the race.

Nothing that was offered to prove the contentions of the challengers was admissable evidence. Even, as I understand it, including the downloaded copies of the birth certificates. However, if ANYthing is accepted by the AJ, the birth certificate copies carry the most weight, thus establishing the native birth of the President. And if I were Jablonski, I would make sure an actual certified copy is submitted by Feb.5. That leaves only the matter of interpretation of the term “natural born” which is beyond the jurisdiction of the AJ, IMO, and I would expect he would kick that particular determination to the SOS or another court.

LineInTheSand: Given that his investigators have no access to the actual b.c. nor to Social Securiity records, they will be unable to draw any conclusions.’So you admit that the b.c. we’ve seen from obama is not the actual one. Thank you for that, it will be entered into the evidence.

You birthers are so STUPID.

How does saying that arpaio has no access to the actuall bc MEAN that you are then ADMITTING that the bc we’ve seen is NOT the actual bc.

LineInTheSand: alg, when did you become omniscient? How do you know what Arpaio will reveal? He has authority as a police officer acting under color of law – that opens doors with any other national police contacts he has. You’re talking completely out of your a**, like most of the obamabot cretins here.

When did you??? You’re the one who said arpaio will imminently publish a detailed report about false documents…….did YOU suddenly become omniscient, you dumb birther???

Sarina: Can a candidate for president be removed just because
some people don’t want him?

Unless we’re dealing with an isolated group that imbued with unique knowledge of damning secrets regarding a candidate,* it would take a lot more than some people not wanting the candidate to remove the candidate from the ballot. Unless they’re unaminous, all elections are eventually won by a candidate some people didn’t want. 😉

Dr. Conspiracy:
Sampson looked it up a commercial database which is legal.

The legality of Sampson’s search is questionable. He had to have a permissible use under the Fair Credit Reporting Act in order to conduct the search. As I recall, LexisNexis cancelled his account because he did not have a permissible use to look into Obama’s records.

The question is whether a candidate can be removed because he is ineligible. I think the answer to that is yes. Whether Obama will be removed from the Georgia Primary Ballot is an open one.

My understanding is that Obama CANNOT be removed from the general election ballot in Georgia if he is the Democratic Party’s nominee. According to a Georgia case and because we do not elect our presidents by popular vote (we vote for “electors”) Obama is not being voted for, but Democratic electors. The Presidential candidate’s name is on the ballot, but that is just a place holder for the electors.

Sarina: Can a candidate for president be removed just because
some people don’t want him?

A letter rogatory or letter of request is a formal request from a court to a foreign court for some type of judicial assistance. The most common remedies sought by letters rogatory are service of process and taking of evidence.

“Plaintiffs herein respectfully request letters rogatory and commission from
Honorable judge Malihi to Honorable judge Rhonda Nishimura if the First Circuit
court of the state of HI to order director of Health Loretta Fuddy to appear at the January 26, 2012 hearing in Farrar v Obama and produce a book of birth records with the original birth certificate of Mr. Barack Obama, as well as corresponding microfiche film.”

It’s a request to a foreign jurisdiction to help with a deposition. For example someone in the US might want to depose someone overseas. They’d seek it out and then get the State Dept to help them by providing a place to depose said individual and I believe someone to serve as the hearing officer. I hear the State Department’s current fee is $2275.

Orly has actually made requests in the past. I think she was trying to get some sort of information in Kenya RE: Obama’s (phony) Kenyan BC.

Also – Orly really screwed the pooch in her request. She made the request to the ALJ who lacks authority to issue them, she got the chapter and verse incorrect, and she selectively trimmed out the part of the law that says that Georgia only issues them to request depositions in foreign countries.

Here’s the law:

9-11-28. Persons before whom depositions may be taken; disqualification for interest; consent of parties

(b) In foreign countries. In a foreign state or country depositions shall be taken on notice before a secretary of embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent of the United States, or before such person or officer as may be appointed by commission or under letters rogatory. A commission or letters rogatory shall be issued only when necessary or convenient, on application and notice, and on such terms and with such directions as are just and appropriate. Officers may be designated in notices or commissions either by name or by descriptive title and letters rogatory may be addressed “To the Appropriate Judicial Authority in (here name the country).

Dr. Conspiracy: Well actually my hobby trip was to come to the American Philatelic Society’s annual meeting here in Atlanta and to visit the High Museum. The birther hearing was added to the trip I already scheduled.

Dr. Conspiracy: Well actually my hobby trip was to come to the American Philatelic Society’s annual meeting here in Atlanta and to visit the High Museum. The birther hearing was added to the trip I already scheduled.

Not much of a stamp collector myself, but I did go to the Pacific 97 International Stamp Exhibition in San Francisco way back when. I bought some interesting stuff that I can’t seem to locate any more (sort of like Obama with his old documents). I also remember that the USPS issued these triangular stamps to commemerate that show:

Dr. Conspiracy:
Well actually my hobby trip was to come to the American Philatelic Society’s annual meeting here in Atlanta and to visit the High Museum. The birther hearing was added to the trip I already scheduled.

I can’t get anyone to even look at my collection down here in Australia. There’s lots of stamp and coin shops all over the place, and even though I haven’t added to it in 30 years or so, its got some pricey pieces in it (well, probably max $100 or so, I’m not the Smithsonian). Nobody is interested in even giving me a quote for insurance, let alone an offer to buy.

y_p_w: and she selectively trimmed out the part of the law that says that Georgia only issues them to request depositions in foreign countries.

She was probably reading through the rules and when her eyes got to the part that didn’t agree with her, they glazed over until she got to the part that did, so that she didn’t even cognitively register the disagreeable stuff. Since she knows she’s right, anything that seems to say otherwise is, perforce irrelevant or just outright wrong. So I doubt Orly thought of herself as cherry-picking.

El Diablo Negro: A letter rogatory or letter of request is a formal request from a court to a foreign court

Well, any extra-jurisdictional court, not necessarily outside the country. Malihi just denied Taitz’s request for letters rogatory to Hawaii attempting to get her hands on the original BC. You gotta hand it to Orly — she’s persistent!

Sometimes I wish Hawaii would just let her see the dang thing just to see the look on her face when she finally realizes it really doesn’t contain the password to the Illuminati’s secret Swiss bank accounts (which also happens to be Obama’s really real SSN). But then it hits me she’d probably insist on dragging Irey with her and demanding he be allowed to run his ink-stained fingers up and down the thing and I realize it’s much safer locked away.

dThe Magic M: Well, the route of “Obama didn’t present any evidence and even if I take the birthers’ evidence as fact, I still haven’t seen Obama prove his 14 year residency”, if he really really wanted to. But I don’t think he will.

I don’t think he can. His mandate is to establish relevant facts and then make a recommendation based on those facts. If he recommends removing Obama, he’ll have to do so based on some sort of consistent narrative derived from the facts on record.

I don’t think he can derive anything resembling a consistent narrative from the steaming pile of poo the plaintiffs gave him. In her entire presentation, Taitz literally said not one thing relevant to the question of eligibility, so Malihi can’t use anything she said.

That leaves Hatfield and Irion. But about the only fact (let alone fact of relevance) in their presentations was that Obama was born in Hawaii (to which plaintiffs stipulated). The rest was simply Vattelist claptrap which is not fact, but legal argument.

Malihi might decide to go full birfer and make recommendation based on Hatfield and Irion’s preentation, but that’d just be setting himself up for overturn on appeal.

LineInTheSand:
Yes, and for my next trick, I’m going to turn a computer-generated piece of s *** t into a valid b.c.!!!

Oh, please! You birfers still have no clue, do you? The PDF is NOT the birth certificate. The state of Hawaii did not certify a PDF. It certified the pieces of paper in Judith Corley’s brief case.

The PDF is utterly, completely, absolutely, altogether, entirely, fully, purely, thoroughly, totally and in toto irrelevant. It doesn’t matter how many layers, artifacts or pixels it has. It. Is. Not. The. Birth. Certificate. Full stop. It is only a picture of the birth certificate.

Arguing the COLB is a forgery because the White House PDF has layers is exactly like arguing Mt. Rushmore doesn’t exist because, you see, I bought this here picture postcard of it, and it’s been photoshopped.

Please, birthers, for the love of Pete — get over the PDF already. And get a clue.

Nathanael: Arguing the COLB is a forgery because the White House PDF has layers is exactly like arguing Mt. Rushmore doesn’t exist because, you see, I bought this here picture postcard of it, and it’s been photoshopped.

But you could argue that New Hampshire’s Old Man of the Mountain doesn’t exist because you have this postage stamp and it has been cancelled.

Nathanael: Please, birthers, for the love of Pete — get over the PDF already. And get a clue.

All the while, some of the birthers print the PDF and submit it to the hearing as evidence that President Obama’s father was born in Kenya. Orly then goes and tries to discredit her co-plaintiffs evidence by trying to show it is a forgery.

JPotter:
If PDFs can re-write history, that one heck of a blank check! What changes should we make first?

Yes – I suppose there must be some Ministry of Truth like the one in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, only using more sophisticated technology than printing presses.

Welcome

Obama Conspiracy Theories since 2008 has been your des­tination for conspiracy theories and fringe views about Barack Obama. Having an argu­ment with your buddies at the office? You're in the right place. Use the Search box below or check out our featured articles. If you don't agree with what you see, feel free to add your thoughts to the over 250,000 comments others have left. To leave a comment not on the current articles, visit the Open Thread.

Quote of the day

Conspiracies

Conspiracies

Sometimes people leave comments designed to offend or outrage the reader, and invoke a firestorm of protest in response. These are the Internet trolls. Replying to them is feeding them and they will come back for more. Refusing to play their game encourages them to go away.